MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6990520408

Diet enrichment with arachidonic and docosahexaenoic acid during the lactation period attenuates the effects of intrauterine growth restriction from birth to maturity in the guinea pig and improves maternal bone mass

2008· dissertation· en· W6990520408 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen MIND · 2008
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicFatty Acid Research and Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsDocosahexaenoic acidLactationArachidonic acidOffspringWeaningIntrauterine growth restrictionPregnancyBone mass
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Intrauterine growth restriction (IUGR) reduces bone mass by 10-30% and impairs arachidonic (AA) and docosahexaenoic (DHA) acid status in infants. Because AA and DHA enhance neonatal bone mass, the aim of this study was to determine the effects of dietary 0.5% AA and 0.2% DHA (w/w) prior to weaning on bone and growth. 40 guinea pigs were randomized to either a control (C) or low-protein diet (LP) during pregnancy and the C diet or the C diet with AA+DHA during lactation. Measurements included bone mass, metabolism, and strength, and erythrocyte lipid of sows and offspring from birth to 16 wk post-partum. The LP diet induced IUGR, while the AA+DHA increased bone mass by 5-20% in sows and offspring and corrected growth and bone mass in IUGR pups. Thus, AA+DHA provided in lactation rescues the growth trajectory in an IUGR state and is beneficial to maternal and neonatal bone mass.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.268 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen MIND→Same topicFatty Acid Research and Health→French-language works237,207→